News-Record.com

Why the heck was the boy advancing towards the police officer? I don't care if he was healthy, mentally retarded or an honor roll student. When a police officer is confronting you for any reason, you better obey his/her commands! That's common sense. I'm sorry the boy died. You ask most folks how they would react when a police officer confronts them and they most likely will tell you with fear and respect (much like most of us used to react to our parents when we did something wrong). Today's norm for kids is to act however they want and question any authority.

"Advancing" isn't very descriptive. Hopefully, there will be store video to show exactly what happened.

Granted, the kid should have stopped. But I don't think you conclude in a situation like this with, "Well, it's his own fault he's dead." We've got to learn more than that.

I agree Doug, we need to learn more and I'm sure we will. Unfortunately, if this Taser situation is anything like most, the conclusion is definitely going to be that the cop was trying to do his job, the kid ignored the cop's instructions, the cop used the Taser to stop the kid from possibly harming the cop and others.

The reason for my first comment wasn't to conclude it's the kid's own fault that he's dead. My point was merely to state that it's common sense to stop when a cop tells you to do so and to certainly not do anything to make the cop think you're going to harm him/her.

I appreciate that. Anyone, in any situation, should immediate obey a police officer's instruction.

I definitely support the use of tasers in appropriate situations. I've supported Sheriff Barnes' decision to have SROs carry them on school campuses, and I still do.

But the death in Charlotte raises a big concern ... because it was a death. When an officer uses a taser, I assume it's not his intent to kill. If he needs to kill, he should use his gun.

The taser is seen as an immobilizer, painful but essentially harmless once the subject recovers.

As such, there could be a tendency by officers to use it in situations where perhaps it's not really necessary. Why not, if it's essentially harmless?

But there are these rare cases where we see a taser is far from harmless.

Was there some contributing factor here? Was the kid on some kind of medication? High on cocaine? Did he have a previously unknown heart condition? It's important to find out.

I don't know if the circumstances justified use of the taser. The kid was "advancing" -- obviously an unwise course, but was he advancing in a threatening, aggressive manner? There were at least two police officers on the scene. Between the two of them, could they have restrained the boy by some other means? Again, important to find answers.

In the meantime, I hope two things:

That anyone who hears an officer tell him to stop, stops immediately.

And that an officer realizes before using a taser that it can kill, and that he make sure he really needs to use it.

The taser is seen as an immobilizer, painful but essentially harmless once the subject recovers.* Doug

Would you care to remind those 250 taser victims in 2007 that they will recover?

Taser Factsheet

TASERS KILL
Despite manufacturer's label of "less-lethal," tasers have been involved in close to 250 deaths in 2007.
TASERS INCREASE DANGER TO PUBLIC, NOT DECREASE IT
Despite police claims that tasers reduce injuries and save lives by providing officers with an alternative to using their firearms or batons, independent studies conclude that tasers are mostly used in situations where police use of lethal force – or even batons, sprays, or hand controls – would never be justified. This means that tasers actually increase the amount of danger to the public, not decrease it. Electro-shock weapons are particularly open to abuse as they can inflict severe pain at the push of a button without leaving substantial marks. Police often subject targets to multiple taser shocks, even while in restraints and often use them against people posing no physical threat, such as against non-violent protesters or simply anyone they perceive to not be heeding a verbal command. Other studies have shown that suspect deaths by gun, or suspect and police injuries have not decreased.
EVEN POLICE ARE SUING TASER
Taser International is being sued by police officers across the nation claiming they were seriously injured after being shocked with the electronic stun gun during training classes. Injuries listed included "painful, permanent and progressive" hearing and vision loss and neurological damage, multiple spinal fractures, burns, a shoulder dislocation and soft-tissue injuries. Many lawsuits, including a few class action suits, have been filed from victims and victim's families for wrongful tasering or death, although Taser, Int. has managed to get many thrown out via legal loopholes.
ORGS CALL FOR BAN
Civil-rights organizations including Amnesty International and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and civil liberty groups including the ACLU of Texas call for moratoriums on their use until independent hard evidence is shown that they are safe, and liken the weapon to a tool of torture. Other community groups and organizations such as various ACLU affiliates promote policy restrictions through local or state legislation. Some cities/localities are curbing or restricting use on their own such as Chicago (they have 300 on the streets compared to Houston's 3,700) or Pflugerville, TX (not using them until the costly "TaserCams" were purchased for better accountability), and some have refused to purchase them altogether for fear of liability and worsening already-negative community relations.
MEDICALLY AND SCIENTIFICALLY UNSOUND
There continues to be a lack of rigorous, independent testing of their medical effects. Amnesty International is calling on US state, federal and local authorities to suspend all transfers and use of tasers and other electro-shock weapons pending a rigorous, independent inquiry into their use and effects. Such an inquiry must be carried out by acknowledged medical, scientific, legal and law enforcement experts who are independent of commercial and political interests in promoting such equipment. Some 'independent' studies that exonerate the weapon have been shown to have ties to Taser, Int.. The US Department of Justice is in the midst of a 2-year comprehensive study that will likely shed some light. At the crux of this debate is that the weapon delivers electroshock directly to the central nervous system via the darts/needle delivery method vs. on the skin/across the grounded body and there is very little information available about the effects of electricity on the brain/nervous system.
CORRUPTION
Taser, Int. stays afloat despite the dead bodies and broad criticism primarily due to taking advantage of many layers of systematic corruption in play long before Tasers. Overly strong local law enforcement associations undermining the community's ability to "police the police" have led to many conflicts of interest such as with county medical examiners who wrongfully rule deaths of persons in police custody to avoid implicating police. Coroners rule many deaths as solely attributed to secondary factors such as drugs, and even going so far to specifically exclude the taser as a possible contributing factor (a brave few HAVE implicated the taser, however, ruling the death as a "homocide"). The new non-medically-recognized catch term, "excited delirium," is being logged as cause of death in many cases (taser and otherwise), suggesting a breach of professionalism as never before. In the judicial system which rarely holds law enforcement accountable, Taser, Int. is breaking ground in filing lawsuits against entities that have published critical medical reviews or conducted critical studies, resulting in a recent chilling effect on the medical and scientific community. Meanwhile, they have embarked on a campaign to meet with and intimidate activists and critical lawmakers as well.

Tasers have a legitimate place as a law-enforcement tool, but all agencies should take a keen interest in the answers to those questions.* Doug

No doubt about that Doug! So how do explain the friendly skies of Homeland security tasering you in the Air over Greensboro?

Will Homeland Security the Militarized Police State Shock You Into Submission?

This is perhaps one of the most kooky and creepy Security State tactics that I have come across: the EMD safety bracelet, which is being billed as the "last line of defence." A company called Lamperd Firearm Training Systems (scroll down) is trying to commercialize this item as an "airline security product." The company's video that hawks this device talks about the current facial recognition system called biometrics, where cameras capture photos of people and compare those images to the images of "terrorists" in its "terrorist" database. No matter how sophisticated this technology, it can all too often allow a terrorist on board a plane, and, this technology can also have the effect of creating airport bottlenecks. Ahem. The solution? The "viable, workable answer" is an electronic ID bracelet. This bracelet will replace the need for a ticket and contain all necessary information about the person, and as a bonus, it can allow the passenger to be tracked through the terminal. Crew members would be empowered with radio frequency transmitters to subdue "hijackers." The technology will override a person's central nervous system and zap them down quicker than you can say "Homeland Security." The company assures us that being dragged through the bracelet process is a "small inconvenience in order to assure your safe arrival." In fact, its studies show that most people would "happily opt" for wearing the bracelet to "insure their own security."

Here's the Lamperd video on YouTube - you must watch it. Here's the patent for this device. The patent actually reads this:

Upon activation of the electric shock device, through receipt of an activating signal from the selectively operable remote control means, the passenger wearing that particular bracelet receives the disabling electrical shock from the electric shock device. Accordingly, the passenger becomes incapacitated for a few seconds or perhaps a few minutes, during which time the passenger can be fully subdued and handcuffed, if necessary. Depending on the type of transmission medium used to send the activating signal, other passengers may also become temporarily incapacitated, which is undesirable and unfortunate, but may be unavoidable.

Lamperd even posts a series of letters on its website showing interest in the product for use "outside of airport security," which, of course, is the real reason for the product. Why it can be used for border control to subdue illegal aliens or by local law enforcement agencies to control the "criminal element!"

I haooen to know that the kid was walking and talking to EMT's following the event. He got tasered for attempting to strike an officer with some sharpo metal shelves.

He died a significant time following the deployment of the taser. The taser did not kill him. I bet his toxicology report will be very interesting reading and will show that he had injested a lethal dose of some narcotic prior to meeting with police.

I haooen to know that the kid was walking and talking to EMT's following the event. He got tasered for attempting to strike an officer with some sharpo metal shelves.

He died a significant time following the deployment of the taser. The taser did not kill him. I bet his toxicology report will be very interesting reading and will show that he had injested a lethal dose of some narcotic prior to meeting with police.

I haooen to know that the kid was walking and talking to EMT's following the event. He got tasered for attempting to strike an officer with some sharpo metal shelves.

He died a significant time following the deployment of the taser. The taser did not kill him. I bet his toxicology report will be very interesting reading and will show that he had injested a lethal dose of some narcotic prior to meeting with police.

I haooen to know that the kid was walking and talking to EMT's following the event. He got tasered for attempting to strike an officer with some sharpo metal shelves.

He died a significant time following the deployment of the taser. The taser did not kill him. I bet his toxicology report will be very interesting reading and will show that he had injested a lethal dose of some narcotic prior to meeting with police.

I haooen to know that the kid was walking and talking to EMT's following the event. He got tasered for attempting to strike an officer with some sharpo metal shelves.

He died a significant time following the deployment of the taser. The taser did not kill him. I bet his toxicology report will be very interesting reading and will show that he had injested a lethal dose of some narcotic prior to meeting with police.